GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 143 
animals sprayed or dipped, and after reasonable 
notice, on the failure of the owner to obey, the 
veterinarian might seize and dip the animals, and 
hold them, or sell them for the cost of the pro- 
cedure. The constitutionality of the law was 
attacked. The court held that the only authority 
of the state for the enforcement of animal inspec- 
tion laws was as a police regulation. The author- 
ity conferred by the legislature upon the state 
veterinarian was not an improper delegation of 
legislative power, nor a violation of due process 
of law, though the reasonableness of the require- 
ments imposed by the state veterinarian might be 
litigated were they properly put in issue.28 
107. Quarantine Regulations Should Be Pub- 
lished. Quarantine rules and regulations may be 
general or specific. In the specific application of 
general rules to individual cases it is often neces- 
sary to make special orders. These orders, includ- 
ing the general laws and regulations on the sub- 
ject, should be served in writing, or printed, upon 
the responsible party caring for the animals to be 
quarantined; and a record should be made of the 
facts by whom and on whom the papers were 
served, and the time when. If the orders be writ- 
ten a carbon copy should be preserved by the 
officer. This may avoid complications in the fu- 
ture, and furnishes the basis of proof in case of 
legal contest. General rules and regulations, 
whether issued by a board or by an executive 
officer, should be published in such a manner as 
to be easily accessible to all citizens, and especially 
28 Arbuckle v. Pflaeging, 123 
Pac. 918, 20 Wy. 351. 
